Tariff Cut - What it really means

grahamc2003

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

I seemed to have strayed onto a forum where people don't seem to read the original posting before bashing out their pre-determined prejudicial responses.

Please re-read my post again and you will see that the point I am making is that even after the tariff cut the poor will still be subsidising the rich, and I think you actually agree with me . Solar PV will continue but it will be solely for the filthy rich large home-owners who want to display their 'green' credentials for all to see.

I read and understood your (rather obviuous) points, so your first assertion is incorrect.

No need to read your post again, thanks, since it's obvious that halving a subsidy with a flow of cash from the poor to the rich is unlikley to stop that flow, but thanks for pointing it out anyway. Perhaps that's one of the reasons why I'm against these subsidies, and suggested I'd prefer them stopped altogether.

I have no obection to people sticking as many solar panels as they like on their roof for whatever reason, as long as they pay for it and there isn't a system in place to subsidise them. In fact, I wish the situation were that it made sense for everyone to generate their own electricity from solar panels on their roof at an affordable cost for everybody, but I'm afraid the reality isn't like that.

You obviously also missed the main point of my post, which was that the establishment of some sort of cost-effective analysis on 'green' subsidies has now been established, which seems much more profound than the fit being cut prematurely and more greatly than some expected.

Your post seems to indicate that any response to your post must be a 100% answer to your post with no extrapolation into related areas, but I'm afraid that's not the case, so no need to get stroppy.

jetski690

I think the people saying the prices will come crashing down may initially see a drop in prices whilst the warehouses that are full now try to sell off their surplus stock but long term the uk is a very small minnow in the world of solar pv and the world market will dictate what the price of solar panels will be not the uk.

Ben84

I doubt that they represented the best value way to reduce carbon emissions, so I'm not unhappy with their being reduced. There was also some unfairness as so many people could not use them, people who rent, people in apartments, anyone who moves house often, those without a suitable roof and people who just can't afford them.

The government are at the moment very keen on schemes that involve people borrowing lots of money and buying new things. The car scrapping scheme, the boiler scrapping scheme and solar/renewable energy installations. I'm fairly sure that a not too widely advertised element of most environmental schemes is to boost spending - but I feel this isn't really what it's about. Consuming new goods is not only non-essential to the idea, it just isn't that green. I also believe that most of these schemes saved less pollution than many no or low cost ideas like raising minimum appliance efficiency or the levels of insulation in new build houses to higher levels than have been decided so far. If we wanted to do something there were many obvious low hanging fruit that were passed by when each of these schemes was chosen.

If however there is money to spend, I think we need to think much bigger than expensive small renewable installations. The cost per kWh is usually unrealistically high for them to ever provide the large quantities of energy we consume. We could build more nuclear power, or find a use for the largely wasted thermal output of power plants in industry or district heating. We could also spend on energy saving R&D, the products of which could save vastly more energy both here in the UK and abroad while making us money.

rogerblack

LARGE labels on appliances, as prominent as the price.
'Sony EX723 46 Inch 3D Full HD Freeview HD LED Internet TV 1299.99 ( £1320
with 5 years electricity)

'Beko CDA554 Silver Fridge Freezer - Express Delivery. £319.98 ( £464 with 5 years electricity)

(there would be details of how this was worked out on the back)

I somewhat disagree that small solar can't be part of the solution.
The fundamental problem at the moment is it's being done all wrong.
A solution where someone comes to your house to install small amounts of panels will never be economical.

One way it might work would be DIY garden buildings with integrated solar roofs, supplied as a kit.
A solar survey device - a camera on a pole - is supplied, and the prospective owner told if the site is suitable.
If it is, their shed is shipped to them, they put it up, and plug the shed into the mains.

Cardew

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

3) The amount of green 'tax' loaded onto everyone's electricity bills (poor and rich alike) is not going to change as there was always a finite subsidy available for the FIT scheme. It will just mean that this limit will be reached later rather than sooner.

With a finite sum available, surely cutting the FIT by over 50%(and 63% for Rent a Roof companies) will not only mean the limit will be reached later, but over twice as much 'Green Energy' will be produced for that finite sum.

e.g. If I have 5 pounds to buy 'widgets' I can obtain a fixed amount. If the price of widgets falls by 50% I can obtain twice that amount.

The trouble with these sorts of discussion, it is predicated on the assumption that generation by Solar PV is desirable - and it aint! At our latitudes it is just about the least efficient method of generating Green Energy - beaten in the inefficiency stakes only by a B & Q Windsave turbine mounted in an attic.

zeupater

Cardew wrote: »

.... At our latitudes it is just about the least efficient method of generating Green Energy ...

I think you mean least cost effective .... :cool::D

Z

across

i have a surveyor coming monday about rent a roof possibility is it still worth going ahead if its free how will the change for us if its rent a roof scheme?i am a little confused will it just affect the buisness providing the panels and those who buy their own or will i be worse off too even if they are free?:question:
also are they not a health hazard for children sleeping under them?this worries me as you wouldnt put your kids under a pilon to sleep!many thanks for any advice given as i am a little confused about them

larkim

If I had £14k today in the bank, and I wanted solar, what would I do? Would I a) spend nothing at all and get solar installed under a RaR scheme, with the installer bearing the risk of future changes to FiT subsidies (in the light of the changes made recently) or b) spend £14k and risk my own money for a gain in about 8 or 10 years time.

My personal view is that the RaR schemes are very low risk and should be snapped up now if you can. There are different arguments about whether or not the installation enhances or reduces the value of your property on re-sale; my view is that it is an enhancement, but let's for arguments sake say that there is, on average, no effect. So in that situation you get a guaranteed saving of some small amount on your electricity bills from now until the system packs up. And if the installer fails to get their paperwork in to register for the FiT payments, that's their problem not yours.

On the other hand, installing your own in the current climate where you might miss the paperwork deadlines due to unforeseen complications (e.g. parts don't arrive on time, installer falls ill and can't make the appointment, system can't be commissioned due to some last minute technical hitch, papers get lost in the post etc etc) seems to me as of today to be an unacceptable risk with my own money.

Apart from the future house sale value risk (which as I've said I've considered to be nil for myself, others disagree), I can't see any risk with trying to get a RaR installation done, and leave the FiT payment risks with someone else.

Matt

Brian99_2

across wrote: »

....are they not a health hazard for children sleeping under them?this worries me as you wouldnt put your kids under a pilon to sleep!many thanks for any advice given as i am a little confused about them

The panels are all high voltage DC (direct current). No problem from electromagnetic WAVES.

(edit....BUT DONT TOUCH THEM!!)

energysavingexp

Brian99 wrote: »

The panels are all DC (direct current). No problem !

DC is still dangerous at these voltages up to 500v
it can still kill you